Cannabis Linked to Depression, Schizophrenia

Yahoo News ^ | 11/21/02 | Patricia Reaney

[freekitty]

What can I say? Everything according to the all knowing appears to have a negative affect at one time or another(which means what suits one's current agenda) on us as human beings. The reason I think legalizing weed might not be a good idea is no one would ever get anything done; because they to busy laughing or running to the fridge. We would have the laziest society ever.

[Lysander]

This has been known by experienced clinicians for a long time.

As an experienced therapist with more then 25 years under my belt I must clearly say you are full of hokum and bunk. By far the use of pot by depressed people is an attempt at self medication, not a cause.

[Lysander]

We would have the laziest society ever.

If you are right, which you are not, would that include you? If not what business is it of yours?

[Paulus Invictus]

Are you implying that marijuana users driving under the influence have not caused fatal accidents? That's funny since the police reports always mention the DUIs around here are often due to pot use, not just alcohol. I agree with you that alcohol causes more damage on the road than pot, but they both are in the same league--people killers. If pot now is seen to cause severe mental damage, why is it a good thing to inhale?

[Wolfie]

The Drug Czar says marijuana is more dangerous than heroin, cocaine, and crystal meth, so they must be on to something.

[GovernmentShrinker]

I don't think it's a good thing at all. I just think that no intellectually honest argument can be made for treating marijuana (and I refuse to use chummy nicknames for these things!) more harshly than alcohol, as the evidence indicates that far more innocent people are killed and maimed and otherwise seriously harmed by alcohol than by marijuana. Unfortunately, the last time we tried a legal ban on alcohol it was spectacularly unsuccessful, as is the current legal ban on marijuana.

[notdownwidems]

roses are red
violets are blue
I'm schizophrenic
and so am I

[ofMagog]

The voices in my head told us WE ARE NOT SCHIZOPHRENIC!

[ofMagog]

LOL! Post #47 may irritate your T-zone.

[RLK]

Hey, Dude. You still vacationing on the boat?

As far as further drug discussion on the thread, I'm going to elt it lie. It's too complicated and unproductive for me to deal with here. I have too much other work to do.

RLK

[freekitty]

Stop trying to bate me. And the answer is no, I don't do drugs, if that is any of your business. Also, you have no idea is I am right or not.

[robertpaulsen]

Let's get rid of the nanny state first, then we can consider adding another drug to the legal list. Why overburden our existing system?

[dark_lord]

You make a good point about the overburdening of our existing system. But as I pointed out in a separate thread, the high murder rate in Chicago (for example) is directly related to drugs being illegal. I said something like - "People don't do drivebys for a 2% profit margin." The other thing is that the WOD, because of all the dealers shooting each other and bystanders, is a direct cause of the leftists getting popular support for banning guns, which undermines the 2nd amendment.

Me - I would rather see them attack it from both directions. Decriminalize marijuana at the federal level - and then let the states decide. Some would probably react by increasing criminal penalties for marijuana. Some would legalize it. But it would be 10th amendment issue.

Then, reallocate the police resources currently consumed with marijuana arrests (paperwork, court time, jail population costs, etc.) and roll them on to heroin, cocaine, crack, and meth. The user population is much smaller for those drugs, and the increased police activity and increased money available should make a serious dent in the crime in that area. Also, at the federal level - reallocate cops and dollars that currently focus on marijuana to focus on the illegal immigrant problem.

That's how I would handle it.

[robertpaulsen]

Good points. I'm not as optimistic as you regarding the gangs. Take away the profits from marijuana and they'll focus on the hard drugs like never before (ending prohibition only stopped the violence associated with alcohol -- the gangs brought back the violence with drugs).

Increased police activity? Man, they're already getting a whole bunch of grief with no-knock, search and seizure, asset forfeiture, SWAT tactics, mandatory minimum sentencing, etc. Sounds great on paper.....

As I've stated before on this forum, state's decriminalization of 'personal use' amounts will get you 90% of what you want. The individual state could decide to punish the user with only a small fine (like a traffic ticket). No court time, no police time in court, no jail time, and it would not go on one's record.

[Xenalyte]

Aaaargh - you beat me to it! I'm not sure about the schizo part, but when I hear how expensive the chronic is, I get way down.

[Xenalyte]

They went berserk with rage in Nevada when the voters said no to legalized pot.

Why didn't we hear about all the rioting and looting they perpetrated?

(For the record, stoners don't go berserk. We're too occupied laughing at uptight WODders.)

[Xenalyte]

I am about fed up with you people here who disparage Libertarians.

Democrats want the strongest interpretation of the first amendment, and the weakest interpretation of the second.

Republicans want the weakest interpretation of the first amendment, and the strongest interpretation of the second.

Libertarians want the strongest interpretation of ALL of the first ten amendments.

I gave up on the Republican party when Lott caved on the CW treaty. And will never go back until Lott is gone.

What you said, sir. Masterful statement.

[Xenalyte]

Let me say something very pragmatic. If we have to get the Federal government to drop the WOD on pot and turn it over to the states (which I favor for 10th amendment reasons, not because I smoke because I don't smoke anything); in exchange for which the Libertarians support the work on rolling back abortion on demand - is that not a fair trade? Let some potheads legally damage their lungs in exchange for preventing baby murder? Hmmm??? Which is more important to you - laughing at the Libertarians and calling them idiots, or rolling back abortion on demand? While you think it over, go back and count the votes on the wins in the last election. Really, really, narrow. We can fix that.

Amen.

Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[dark_lord]

Sorry, no newsletter.
I like the pics on your homepage.
Did you ever check out the Society for Creative Anachronism?

[Paulus Invictus]

Actually no, your brains are partly fried so you wouldn't know when, if or where you should go berserk. Hang loose! The country needs a portion of brain deads for comparison purposes. Oh, and pay the full $$$ tab so the CA happy pot farmers can help shore up state's failing economy. We need it! The Gov has nearly bankrupted us.